Ramiro Tula Rubio v. Loretta Lynch
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 8449
| 5th Cir. | 2015Background
- Tula-Rubio, a Mexican citizen, seeks cancellation of removal under §1229b(a).
- Entered the United States in 1992 as a waved-through entrant; later became a lawful permanent resident in 2002.
- While an LPR, he was convicted of Texas offenses (possession of marijuana, evading arrest) in May 2006.
- After a 2013 trip to Mexico, he attempted to reenter and was charged with removability; IJ denied cancellation and Board dismissed on the same theory.
- The central legal question is whether a wave-through entry constitutes an “admission in any status” under §1229b(a)(2), triggering the seven-year continuous-residence requirement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a wave-through admission satisfies §1229b(a)(2) | Tula-Rubio argues the 1992 wave-through admission counts as an admission in any status. | Government/Board argues the wave-through is an admission but not in any status, thus not triggering the seven-year clock. | Yes; the wave-through admission satisfies the requirement; petition granted and remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Martinez Gutierrez, 132 S. Ct. 2011 (Supreme Court 2012) (defines admitted as lawful entry and discusses seven-year clock start)
- In re Blancas-Lara, 23 I. & N. Dec. 458 (B.I.A. 2002) (broad interpretation of ‘any status’ to include immigrants and nonimmigrants)
- In re Quilantan, 25 I. & N. Dec. 285 (B.I.A. 2010) (recognizes admission via waved-through entry as admission under §1101(a)(13)(A))
- Deus v. Holder, 591 F.3d 807 (5th Cir. 2009) (discusses status and admission distinctions under §1229b(a)(2))
- Dean v. United States, 556 U.S. 568 (Supreme Court 2009) (treats statutory interpretation with respect to breadth of terms like ‘any’)
- Martinez Gutierrez, 132 S. Ct. 2011 (Supreme Court 2012) (see above (same citation listed for emphasis))
- Gonzales v. Oliverez, 520 U.S. 1 (1997) (discusses breadth of ‘any’ in statutory construction)
- Ali v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 552 U.S. 214 (2008) (expansive meaning of ‘any’ modifier)
- Comm’r v. Lundy, 516 U.S. 235 (1996) (canon on identical words in statutes having same meaning)